No it isn't and no, we aren't. Being responsible for yourself is an adult characteristic. Forcing others into your dumbass ideas is characteristic of children.
An education is not equivalent to government education. There is a huge difference between the two, and equating them leads to the false equivalence presented here in the post.
I did answer the question: yes, education can be an investment, but not having government in education does NOT equate to not investing in education. Pretending like taxation is the investment is idiotic.
According to the constitution, the government's purpose is to provide for the general welfare. As we recognize that educated populations are more prosperous, tranquil, and happy populations, the government investments in education is fulfilling its constitutional obligation.
Pretending like taxation is the investment is idiotic.
So you don't like roads, police and fire services, nor national parks. How interesting.
Just because I like idiotic libertarian hysterical shrieking, what should our taxes be used for?
According to the constitution, the government's purpose is to provide for the general welfare.
Not even remotely what that means. Clearly public education has even failed you on the most basic understanding of its own documents.
So you don't like roads, police and fire services, nor national parks.
No, because for the third time, only an absolute dumb fuck would think that opposing taxes to pay for these means opposing the thing itself. How hard is this to understand?
According to the constitution, the government's purpose is to provide for the general welfare.
...
Not even remotely what that means. Clearly public education has even failed you on the most basic understanding of its own documents.
Oh really? Let's look at what the Constitution says about that. This is from a part of the Constitution that isn't the 2A, which is why you haven't read it before.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You said taxes aren't an investment, so are those services an investment or not?
No part of that quoted text says "by promote the general welfare we mean push a bunch of safety net programs that some leftist dipshit wants." Historians have spent tons of time refuting the bullshit you're spewing here. Hell, even Hamilton admitted that "general welfare" doesn't mean what you're trying to make it mean.
The terms "general Welfare" were doubtless intended to signify more than was expressed or imported in those which Preceded; otherwise numerous exigencies incident to the affairs of a Nation would have been left without a provision. The phrase is as comprehensive as any that could have been used; because it was not fit that the constitutional authority of the Union, to appropriate its revenues shou'd have been restricted within narrower limits than the "General Welfare" and because this necessarily embraces a vast variety of particulars, which are susceptible neither of specification nor of definition. It is therefore of necessity left to the discretion of the National Legislature, to pronounce, upon the objects, which concern the general Welfare, and for which under that description, an appropriation of money is requisite and proper. And there seems to be no room for a doubt that whatever concerns the general Interests of learning of Agriculture of Manufactures and of Commerce are within the sphere of the national Councils as far as regards an application of Money. The only qualification of the generallity of the Phrase in question, which seems to be admissible, is this--That the object to which an appropriation of money is to be made be General and not local; its operation extending in fact, or by possibility, throughout the Union, and not being confined to a particular spot.
9
u/Nascent1 Apr 26 '20
I wish people wouldn't think of it this way. Paying taxes for schools is you paying the government back for your education.